QFR No - 8000788831
Defect Details
| NC No. | 8000788831 |
| NC Date | 25/05/2022 |
| NC Submission Date | |
| Part No. | 53BKZ00102 |
| Part Name | RUBBER BUSH |
| Supplier Name & Code | 101023-FORES ELASTOMECH INDIA PVT. LT |
| ETL Plant | 1136-ETL Suspension Sanand |
| Defect Details | NOT AS PER LIMIT SAMPLE-SHORT SHOT |
1. Problem Description
| Defect Description | Short shot |
| Detection Stage | Inprocess |
| Problem Severity | Function |
| NG Quantity | 13 |
| Is Defect Repeatative? | No |
| Defect Sketch / Photo | 3jd0wsglcjllsqocql1hxmsz.jpg |
Supplier Communication Details
| Quality Head Email ID | malani.pritam@foresgroup.com |
| Plant Head/CEO Email ID | singh.barinder@foresgroup.com |
| MD Email ID | swamy.pj@foresgroup.com |
2. Stock Details & action taken for NG parts
| Location | ETL End | Warehouse | Transit | Supplier FG | Supplier WIP | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total Qty |
1000
|
0
|
0
|
1000
|
0
|
2000
|
| Check Qty |
1000
|
0
|
0
|
1000
|
0
|
2000
|
| NG Qty |
32
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
32
|
| Scrap | 32 |
| Rework | 0 |
| Under Deviation | 0 |
| Containment Action |
|---|
| 100 % Stock verify at Fores End . |
3. Process Flow
| Process Flow Description |
|---|
| Rubber & Chemical - Inward inspection - Rubber Mixing - Hardness inspection - Moulding - Visual inspection - Standard packing & Dispatch . |
4. Process Details
| Process / Operation | Molding |
| Outsource | No |
| Machine / Cell | Moulding |
| Machine / Cell No. | Moulding |
5. Problem Analysis
| Type | Possible Cause | Fact Verification | Jud |
|---|---|---|---|
| Machine | Mold temperature less or more | PLC controlled if parameter not okay found then machine stop | X |
| Man | Skipped from inspection | Inspector not aware | O |
| Machine | Curing Time Less or more | PLC controlled if parameter not okay found then machine stop | X |
| Material | Material sequence not followed at Intermix in Mixing department | Error proofing system for chemical weighing , so there is no chances of variation in chemical weight | X |
| Material | Wrong material used | Last six month hardness data verified found okay | X |
6. Inspection Method Analysis (Current)
| Inspection Method | Other |
| Other Inspection Method | Visual |
| Check Point at Final Inspection | No |
| Checking Freq. | 100% |
| Sampling | No |
| Sample Size | 100 % |
7. Root Cause Analysis (Occurance)
| Why 1 | Short Mould |
| Why 2 | weak joint in rubber to rubber |
| Why 3 | Material Flow is less in mold cavity |
| Why 4 | material Flow Not uniform for all cavity . |
| Why 5 | Carbon deposition in mold cavity . |
| Root Cause (Occurance) | Carbon Deposition in mold cavity . |
Root Cause Analysis (Outflow)
| Why 1 | Short mold |
| Why 2 | Skip from inspection |
| Why 3 | Inspector not aware about potential failure |
| Why 4 | |
| Why 5 | |
| Root Cause (Outflow) | Inspector not aware about potential failure . |
8. Countermeasure ( Occurrence , Outflow & System side Actions )
| Type | Countermeasure Details | Responsibility | Target Date | Actual Date | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outflow | Q gate Implement at Inspection stage ( 200 % inspection start for one month . | Amar Patil . | 25/05/2022 | 20/05/2022 | Completed |
| Occurance | Clean the Mould ( remove all carbon ) | Mr Zukle | 25/05/2022 | 19/05/2022 | Completed |
| Occurance | Mold cleaning frequency Increase | Mr Zukle | 25/05/2022 | Pending | |
| Outflow | 100 % Marking start an ID of part for One month . | Mr Shinde | 25/05/2022 | 19/05/2022 | Completed |
9. Inspection Method After Customer Complaint
| Change In Inspection System | No |
| Change Details | Visual |
| Inspection Method | Other |
| Other Inspection Method | Visual |
| Check Point at Final Inspection | Yes |
| Checking Freq. | 100% |
| Sampling | No |
| Sample Size | 100 % |
10. Evidance of Countermeasure
| Occurance (Before) |
Mold unclean ( carbon deposition observed in mold cavity ) . 148_Occurance_Before.xlsx |
| Occurance (After) |
Clean the Mold .
Dirt cleaning frequency increase from three month to Two month . 148_Occurance_After.pdf |
| Outflow (Before) |
Inspector not aware & Insufficient training. 148_Outflow_Before.png |
| Outflow (After) |
Training given to Inspector .
200 % inspection start for one month .
Inspection marking start for one month . 148_Outflow_After.xlsx |
11. Horizontal Deployment
| Horizontal Deployment Required | Yes |
| Applicable Machine / Model / Plant | N/A |
12. Document Review
| Documents | |
| Specify Other Document | N/A |
13. Effectiveness Of Action
| Reviewed Quantity | 0 |
| Reason for submission | 1. Fact Verification and Jud. are not aligned. Also detail statement to be given in fact verification 2. Root cause occurenec side Why 5 statement are not clear, detaile clear statement to be written. Just mold unclean could not be root cause. 3. Outflow side root cause not identified. Why inspector are not aware about potential failure?? 4. System side cause must be identified in Why 5. 5. Countermeasure are not adequate i.e. no training given to perator, No OPL was displayed etc. 6. Q-gate implemented at FI stage, how it could be a root cause while already Visual inspection done at FI stage. If previously visual inspection not done then how operator unawarness could be root cause of outflow. 7. All relevant documents for all causes and actions are not attached. All evidences must be attached to confirm action and root cause. Zip file can be uploaded. Hence Upload multiple files in compressed form. 8. Horizontal deployment is yes but machine detailes not mentioned. it should be mentioned. 9. All updated documents must be reflect in section number 12. |